Bengladeshi Opinion of Kashmiris

[ares]

You can not depict an Ant issue as an Elephant issue. How many people were died for each issue? And how many countries and people see each issue equally. And how many troops are deployed in Balochistan and Kashmir. Does the same percentage of people react against their respective issues. Anyway, any logic will work but the might. Over.

"Elephant and ant issue" these are all perception and different issues are equally important different set of people."

Number of death is not a measure of anything

ie more than thirty thousand people have died in Pakistan in Taliban related violence, because Taliban want sharia laws in Pakistan..so does that mean Pakistan should bend over and accept Taliban's terms?

 

[ares]

People aspiration theory i think came from here

India accepted the accession, regarding it provisional until such time as the will of the people could be ascertained by a plebiscite, since Kashmir was recognized as a disputed territory. India applied to the United Nations for a resolution of the issue and a temporary line of control was created. The plebiscite recommended by the UN and promised by India in the Indian White Paper on Kashmir was never conducted due to intransigence on the part of both Indian and Pakistani governments.


As the plebiscite requirements were never met by both Govts, this issue remains unresolved.

But you also do know that United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 is

Not mandatory

Not time bound

and
Only applicable if both the countries accept it.(Which is not the case)

 

[mehru]

But you also do know that United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 is

Not mandatory

Not time bound

and
Only applicable if both the countries accept it.(Which is not the case)

Correct. Fault lies with both Govts.

 

[Roybot]

After two attempts OP still couldn't get "Bangladeshi" right, speaks volumes about the importance of Bangladeshi opinion in the Kashmir imbroglio.

 

[Dance]

Sorry Mehru --- we all know how the Khan of Kalat was 'forced' to join the union of Pakistan and how still many Balochis aspire for freedom from Pakistan.

The only thing missing is an artificial UN stamp -- but does that matter when we are speaking about the aspirations of the people.

It is a very valid comparison.

Same thing can be said about Hyderabad. I know it will be hard for you but it would be nice if you stop trolling and stick to the topic, which is about Kashmir.

 

[Moorkh]

Same thing can be said about Hyderabad. I know it will be hard for you but it would be nice if you stop trolling and stick to the topic, which is about Kashmir.

go ahead. try comparing hyderabad and kashmir or balochistan or bangladesh. try as hard as you can. but my friend, there is no "independence movement" going on there.

 

[Dance]

go ahead. try comparing hyderabad and kashmir or balochistan or bangladesh. try as hard as you can. but my friend, there is no "independence movement" going on there.

I was comparing Hyderabad to what he said about Balochistan:

"we all know how the Khan of Kalat was 'forced' to join the union of Pakistan"

theres no independence movement going on there but there is a huge one in indian occupied Kashmir, which is what the topic is about.

 

[eastwatch]

In my previous post I have said that India is not willing to relinquish Kashmir because almost all the Sub-continent water sources lie in Kashmir, and India will lose its control of flow of water to even its own country if it allows Kashmir to slip away from its hand.

Now, about Azad Kashmir in Pakistani control.

1) It has cut off a direct border between India and Afghanistan, and to the central asia by proxi.
2) It has created a direct international border between Pakistan and China.

If the divided Kashmir has such advantages for both Pakistan and India, then it would be wise for both the countries to make some changes in the present ceasefire line or Line of Control, and make it a permanent international border.

India will not agree to a plebiscite. But, it can happen only Kashmiris themselves want it. But, there are people inside India-held Kashmir who may think they are better off with a special status in India, rather than being a part of Taliban-infested Pakistan. They may not forsee a better future as an independent country or being a part of Pakistan.

However, things may change in the future when the Kashmiri population increase to, say, 15 or 20 million. A small population cannot oppose a rule by their overlord. If 20 million people start opposing a rule, it will not be possible for India to hold it for ever.

So, Kashmiri mothers, bear more and more children, and help Kashmir to get its independence from India.

 

[eastwatch]

Everyone knows that Mr.Jinnah sent Army into Kalat in April 1948 and forcefully annexed Balochistan against the wishes of the ruler Mir Ahmad Khan.

People can say the same to India, too. Think of Kashmir, Junagadh, Hydrabad of Nizam, Tripura. There must be some dozen other states where India forced the rulers to relinquish sovereignty and join it. Think of Goa, Daman and Diu. Did the people there rose and revolted against the Portuguese or did Indian army attacked those enclaves unilaterally and took away their freedom of choice?

 

[integra]

^^^you forgot Sikkim. The last one....

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah with Khan of Kalat

 

[ares]

In my previous post I have said that India is not willing to relinquish Kashmir because almost all the Sub-continent water sources lie in Kashmir, and India will lose its control of flow of water to even its own country if it allows Kashmir to slip away from its hand.

Now, about Azad Kashmir in Pakistani control.

1) It has cut off a direct border between India and Afghanistan, and to the central asia by proxi.
2) It has created a direct international border between Pakistan and China.

If the divided Kashmir has such advantages for both Pakistan and India, then it would be wise for both the countries to make some changes in the present ceasefire line or Line of Control, and make it a permanent international border.

India will not agree to a plebiscite. But, it can happen only Kashmiris themselves want it. But, there are people inside India-held Kashmir who may think they are better off with a special status in India, rather than being a part of Taliban-infested Pakistan. They may not forsee a better future as an independent country or being a part of Pakistan.

However, things may change in the future when the Kashmiri population increase to, say, 15 or 20 million. A small population cannot oppose a rule by their overlord. If 20 million people start opposing a rule, it will not be possible for India to hold it for ever.

So, Kashmiri mothers, bear more and more children, and help Kashmir to get its independence from India.

If I would not have know better, I would have thought you are talking about some kind viral infection, trying to multiply inside the host so that it can overpower its immune system.

Is out breeding others the only strategy you guys have..been hearing, same strategy for the North East..How bangladeshi illegal immigrants will outnumber the local and then takeover everything and now same for Kashmir.

 

[aviator]

In my previous post I have said that India is not willing to relinquish Kashmir because almost all the Sub-continent water sources lie in Kashmir, and India will lose its control of flow of water to even its own country if it allows Kashmir to slip away from its hand.

Now, about Azad Kashmir in Pakistani control.

1) It has cut off a direct border between India and Afghanistan, and to the central asia by proxi.
2) It has created a direct international border between Pakistan and China.

If the divided Kashmir has such advantages for both Pakistan and India, then it would be wise for both the countries to make some changes in the present ceasefire line or Line of Control, and make it a permanent international border.

India will not agree to a plebiscite. But, it can happen only Kashmiris themselves want it. But, there are people inside India-held Kashmir who may think they are better off with a special status in India, rather than being a part of Taliban-infested Pakistan. They may not forsee a better future as an independent country or being a part of Pakistan

I dont have exact source right now but some papers from US state department showed that after 1962 Indo-chinese war, Nehru had offered around 2000sq km or more of Indian Kashmir to pakistan to resolve the matter but pakistan was too convinced that they can also beat India in a war thus refuting the proposal.

Plebiscite ? What Plebiscite ? What were results in Punjab and Bengal ? And who bothered about Sindhi Hindus who even after 63yrs of so called Independence dont know whether they should be in pakistan or migrate to India.

 

[zombieland]

@Zombieland

This is your 18th post and you have started instructing people when to post and when not to.

Anyone can post on this issue and because BD is a Muslim country, they have full right to talk about Kashmiri freedom. ..

Since we relate every single activity we do .... with our religion ...

In that way ... Point taken SIR !!!

 

[zombieland]

p1. There is no mistake.
p2. Your countryman wanted our ideas and views. If you are able to solve then why your country ask US to intervene? And do you know what liberated us? That was our firm determination and busted emotion.

ANyway, I think for having hyper sensitivity, Pakistanis lose many things.

No reply to any element. Over.

P2?? We ask US cos they are our long term ally ... BD is NOT !!!
Since when did u start comparing urself with US. They are our trusted friend and simply speaking you ppl dont fall in that category.

Yes I would agree with you that we are passionate ppl and there has been instances where we might have lost few things but we will overcome them sooner or later ...

Anyways my post is becoming totally off topic ... I would like to end this one here and allow the 'like minded' ppl to continue their discussion.